3 ms·

Didn’t expect to see the Daily Mail at the top of HN.

• seanhunter 3y ago
  Yes. It's especially ironic in this case given the fact that the Daily Mail was pro-appeasement and its proprietor Viscount Rothermere even pro-Hitler[1] and pro-fascist[2] in the run up to WWII. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/apr/01/pressandpublishing.secondworldwar https://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/apr/01/pressandpublis... [2] https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fr6ysv5shwh941.jpg https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fr...
  • lloydatkinson 3y ago
    The Daily Heil, as it’s often referred to, was and still is frequently on the wrong side of history. Pushed for closer relations with Hitler, encouraged people to vote for UKIP, pushed for Brexit, frequently writes literally-proved-in-court lies and slander, the list is long. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail
  • achates 3y ago
    The NYT was telling us that the Holodomor was a lie around the same time, and their Moscow correspondent (Walter Durant) won a Pulitzer for it. So we should probably ignore them too if a paper's opinions from the 1930s are still relevant.
    • xanderlewis 3y ago
      I would largely ignore the NYT, but for other reasons. Their 21st century journalism is bad enough.
• smcin 3y ago
  (I had searched for other more detailed obituaries but didn't find any at the time of posting; since I'm very well aware of the DailyMail's poor reputation.) If you or anyone else find a better obituary please post it.